Gender Stereotyping May Lead to Sexual Discrimination Claims

  • Over 100 Years of Experience

    Our dedicated attorneys have a reputation for success.

    Meet Our Team
  • Our Awards Set Us Apart

    Learn about our distinguishing awards & how this benefits you.

    What It Means For You
  • Client Testimonials

    Many satisfied clients have used Schwartz Perry & Heller.

    What They Have to Say
  • Request Your Consultation

    Contact our firm today to learn how we can help you.

    Get Started Now

Gender Stereotyping May Lead to Sexual Discrimination Claims

Gender stereotyping has recently become a source of friction in the workplace. Most frequently it involves situations where an employee dresses or behaves in a non-traditional manner, especially where questions over sexual orientation arise. As a result, gender stereotyping claims have increasingly led to litigation, usually involving cases where plaintiffs allege that they were disciplined or terminated because they failed to adhere to commonly accepted gender norms. Such actions are a form of sexual discrimination which is prohibited under Title VII.

Another type of gender stereotyping exists when females are perceived as not adhering to supposedly normal gender norms, as for example when she is accused of being overly "aggressive", in other words, behaving like a man. Aggressive behavior may be applauded for male employees, but when displayed by female co-workers, it can be viewed as bossy or otherwise inappropriate. When this difference in perception leads to different outcomes in terms of performance evaluations, litigation can result.

In Potter v. Synerlink Corp., a new unpublished decision from the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals, Stacey Potter was the only female regional salesperson for Synerlink. After several years of top sales and lauded performance, she began clashing with management over her reluctance to give up accounts to a newly formed sales territory. These disputes ultimately led to her termination, and she sued for sex discrimination, claiming that male salespersons had voiced similar objections, but had not been terminated as a result.

A lower court ruled in favor of Synerlink, but the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed. It rejected the employer's contention that Potter was fired for not being a "team player." She introduced testimony from multiple male sales managers who disclosed that they had argued with management over changes in sales territories and customer assignment. These disputes led to negotiation and compromise, rather than termination.

This does not mean that the employer terminated the plaintiff due to her gender, but it raises the possibility that the stated reason for her termination, not being a "team player", was just a pretext, and that a jury might find that the actual reason was sex discrimination.

The takeaway? If you are a female working in a male dominated workplace, be aware any difference in the way male employees are treated compared to the females. If you are terminated due to what you believe are trumped up reasons, it may actually be because you don't "fit in". That could be considered sexual discrimination under Title VII.

Comments

No Comments Posted

Contact Us

Schwartz Perry & Heller LLP
New York Employment Law Attorney
Located at: 3 Park Ave.,
27th Floor,

New York, NY 10016
View Map
Phone: (646) 490-0221
Local Phone: (212) 889-6565
Website:
© 2018 All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.